Farewell, Friend (1968)

☆ ☆ ☆

Farewell, Friend (1968) – J. Herman

A French heist film with Alain Delon and … Charles Bronson?!?  Intriguing, but actually more of a curiosity than a pleasure.  Somehow Delon and Bronson wind up locked in a polyester company’s basement trying all the possible combinations to a safe that contains 200 million francs.  I guess this might have some parallels to our experience of quarantine right now! But it leads to a bare-chested punch-out between the two leads (but really their stage fighting is pretty crap – Eastwood did better with that orangutan).  The film might work better if the pace weren’t so leisurely but I guess we are supposed to enjoy the repartee between the two leads (which might work better if Bronson weren’t dubbed into French).  Eventually we get to the requisite plot twists which come out of the blue (or is that bleu?) and potentially involve some misogyny which unfortunately might be par for the course in this sort of 1968 manly movie (not denying its underlying homoerotic subtext). Look elsewhere (e.g., the films of Jean-Pierre Melville) for vintage Delon (not sure what to say about Bronson, the most famous Lithuanian – uh, Once Upon a Time in the West?).

  

1917 (2019)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

1917 (2019) – S. Mendes

We follow (mostly literally, with an endless tracking shot) two young British soldiers stationed in France during WWI from the moment they are first recruited to deliver a message to another company (falling into a German trap) to the final moments after the message is delivered.  In between feels very much like a videogame (that tracking shot, which is actually full of invisible cuts, is mostly responsible for this), although this may be the fate of most war movies these days.  The lads encounter different terrain, different situations, and so forth, as they pursue their quest.  The award-winning cinematography by Roger Deakins is certainly amazing (and must have been more so in IMAX).  But let me just state right here that the movie as a whole left me rather cold. Perhaps it’s the sense that the plot is nothing new and merely an opportunity to dazzle us with technique.  Or perhaps it’s the missed opportunities for poetry and reflection that weren’t taken up (although there are occasional glimpses of what could have been).  The story was drawn by director Sam Mendes from stories told to him by his grandfather but by some strange twist of fate they turn out nearly cliché here. They built real trenches and used the studio to good effect.  However, at the end of the day, I think I prefer Peter Jackson’s They Shall Not Grow Old (2018) for a real taste of the Great War.   

Johnny Apollo (1940)

☆ ☆ ☆

Johnny Apollo (1940) – H. Hathaway

Rather soapy gangster drama that probably would have been edgier just a few years later (when director Henry Hathaway was making noirs along with everyone else).  Tyrone Power is the son of a corrupt business tycoon (Edward Arnold) who gets sent to the slammer for 5 to 10.  Although Power first denounces his father, after finding it impossible to get work due to the stigma attached to his name, he seeks the services of a shady lawyer (Charley Grapewin) and falls in with a slick gangster (Lloyd Nolan). Dorothy Lamour plays the moll who sees the good in Power (who has renamed himself “Johnny Apollo”) and seeks to help him to help his dad get out of prison.  Unfortunately, dad has renounced son and only when son is also thrown into the clink do things start to turn around.  Although everyone here gives it their level best, there’s something about the plot mechanics that feel more contrived than usual. Still, it’s always fun to return to Hollywood’s heyday.   

  

Escape to Witch Mountain (1975)

☆ ☆ ☆

Escape to Witch Mountain (1975) – J. Hough

I had a fond memory of liking this one back in the Seventies and so I asked the kids to watch it with me.  I could not remember a whit.  So, in fact, I enjoyed the suspense.  The film starts unusually “in the middle” with two kids, Tia (Kim Richards) and Tony (Ike Eisenmann) being dropped off at an orphanage after their foster parents have died.  Soon, we learn that these kids have psychic powers, which soon come to the attention of a rich businessman (Ray Milland) by way of his employee (Donald Pleasance).  After forged papers release the kids to Pleasance, they spend one night in Milland’s mansion before they realise that trouble is afoot and escape.  The rest of the movie is one long chase – the kids take refuge in Eddie Albert’s Winnebago and he drives them toward their home (revealed by a hidden map in Tia’s “star case”) at Witch Mountain.  There are some funny moments during the chase but perhaps some of it is funny due to the era’s silly special effects.  Aito was not impressed (although I caught him laughing).  Amon might have been a little bit scared.  I enjoyed the nostalgia and the Disney-fied weirdness. 

  

These Three (1936)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

These Three (1936) – W. Wyler

(First) Hollywood version of Lillian Hellman’s play (The Children’s Hour) which focuses on accusations of lesbianism between teachers in a girls’ school but is here “sanitised” to heterosexual cheating (with hints of menage a trois, perhaps?).  The crux of the drama is about a girl’s lying accusations and the damage that they do to everyone involved, including the two teachers (Merle Oberon and Miriam Hopkins), their doctor friend (Joel McCrea), the girl herself (Bonita Granville), and her grandmother (Alma Kruger) who uses her social pressure to close the school.  There may be a moral in here – don’t believe kids? Or probably, don’t be quick to judge? But perhaps something has been lost when the stigma shifted from sexual orientation (still stigmatised today) to something a bit less relevant (although sure to have caused moral panic in the 1930s).  The drama itself takes its time to introduce and flesh out the characters before getting to the pivotal event.  McCrea is friendly and engaging, Oberon a bit distant, and Hopkins a bit negative but together they make a good trio and we are on their side all the way through.  The tacked on Hollywood ending (not sure if this is in the play) tries hard to undo the damage done and manages to sand off some of the film’s sharp (bitter) edges. 

Drug War (2012)

☆ ☆ ☆ ½

Drug War (2012) – J. To

Johnnie To achieved international stardom as a director (after a long varied career) with Election (2005) and Election 2 (2006), Hong Kong gangster films that followed in the wake of the success of Infernal Affairs and its sequel earlier in the decade (not to mention John Woo’s 1980s films).  Drug War follows in the same vein, giving equal attention to the cops and the criminals:  Honglei Sun as the wily police captain who excels at undercover stings vs. Louis Koo as the drug manufacturer forced to work for the cops to take down the kingpin.  The plot is tight with little fat, a great deal of suspense is built up by the various twists and turns, and it all culminates in a massive shoot-out outside a primary school. Of course, there is very little depth here but there are character quirks and eccentric choices enough to make this more than a routine actioner.    

The Endless (2017)

☆ ☆ ☆

The Endless (2017) – J. Benson & A. Moorhead

What have we here?  There’s an outsider/weird American folk horror/stoner vibe to the proceedings (set in rural southern California) that usually garner praise from these quarters  except for the fact that the acting by the leads (also the directors) is sub-par and also because the film dissolves into some sort of self-reflexive in-joke that goes nowhere.  But aside from that I really dug the weirdness:  two guys who were raised in a cult (but then escaped as young adults) return, because of a VHS tape and then nostalgia.  Of course, the prophecies of the cult (three moons etc.) start to come true – or maybe it’s the drugs everyone is doing? A lot of this is just cult members talking but there is a steady sense that something is going to happen (sex, horror, both?). Someone (Glenn Kenny?) mentioned Annihilation (2018) and there’s the same fried feeling here (and invisible god/monster?) and the same eventual total collapse of logic.  But I get the feeling that some viewers don’t quite care whether plots hold up (see the straight-to-video horror genre, for example) and, for them, any WTF is good WTF. I guess I prefer it when there’s actually a pay-off.  But yeah, this has the vibe.